Evaluation Part 3 - Keira

What have you learned from your audience feedback?

To gain audience feedback we mainly used the platform of social networking site Facebook. We used this because our target audience is 16-24, and most users of facebook are in this age bracket. It was also a good base to get comments, due to the sheer volume of members. Here are some facts from October 2009 about Facebook:

• "Each day, people around the world spend more than six billion minutes on Facebook, where they post 40 million status updates and become fans of 10 million pages."
• "In a little more than nine months, Facebook has managed to grow its user base from 150 million active members to 300 million."

These kind of figures clearly demonstrate how popular the site is, and what a good tool it can be used as to advertise or spread word about media products. We created a Facebook group which we invited people to join, which held a discussion about what we should title our film (whether it would be 'Shit' or 'Three Words') and where we posted our video so people could comment. View this page here. We then also posted the video on our individual profile pages and asked people to comment, from which we got most of our evaluative comments. This is a screen grab from my profile page displaying the comments (which I will discuss below).

For the film product our audience feedback has been almost entirely postitive.

On the camera work, we recieved the following comments:

'The framing is very good.'

'Use of handheld camera was a good touch, making it seem more like a point of view shot.'
'The close-ups of him eating were disgusting which worked well!'
'I really like the ‘She’s gorgeous’ close up, which makes really good use of shadow and natural lighting to create a very realist yet beautiful image.'

This tells us that people appreciated the consideration we put into which shot would be used where, and that the close-ups in particular worked well in creating particular images of the characters. It also says that the aim of our handheld camera work was picked up on, which means one of the conventions of social realism which we wanted to use has been fulfilled.

On the editing, we recieved the following comments:
'I like the parallels between the character's views...Also, I like the way it skips so quickly at the end from one to the other and is brought together abruptly at the end as it leaves more for the imagination.'
'The repeated pattern thing but with different views was great'
'...and the alternate views are good and original too not like the typical thing that usually gets done'

This tells us that the main structure of the editing was the thing most appreciated, as it was 'original'. People tended to like the idea of repeating the pattern because it showed the alternate views. As well as these Facebook comments, from word of mouth alot of people told me they liked the ending and how it flipped between the two characters, although they thought the pace could have been quicker there to build the tension more. I entirely agree with this comment and take it on board as something that could be improved were we to do the film again.

On the sound, we recieved the following comments:
'The monologues over the top fit perfectly.'

'The soundtrack goes really nicely. I particularly like the end scene with the well placed parts of telly on in the background.'
'Use of non diegetic sound is very good!'
'...loved the music in the background too. The only thing i would say is sometimes the sound seemed to cut out.'
'...one criticism could be that the sound should be polished a bit more as the sound cut out every now and then.'
'The internal monologues work nicely ...the soundtrack is lovely and compliments the tone of the film overall.'
'The only thing is you can kinda hear where you are starting and stopping the voice recorder.'
'The use of Gavin and Stacey in the background of the final scene was also a really nice touch as a contrast to the painfully awkward situation and as a popular culture reference point which many films and tv shows try to shy away from.'
'...and there wasn't any of that annoying background buzzing noise that ALWAYS happens on media work!'

This tells us that the music (provided by Carl Williams, we let him watch the film without sound and explained the kind of tune we wanted and he came back with a few from which we chose) was greatly appreciated and people generally think that it went well with the action. That our choice of soundtrack to go with the final scene was picked up on, as I picked it to specifically match the action in an ironic way. It's quite surprising but pleasing that people would notice such a subtle choice and choose to comment on it. People seemed to like the fact that the sound was almost entirely non-diegetic, commenting on the nice use of voiceover etc., but this is also stretching the boundaries of social realism as normally there would be far more diegetic than non-diegetic sound. However, as we were incorporating some conventions of other genres it is acceptable. The main criticism (not just of sound but as the piece as a whole) was based on voiceovers in the end scene where Kate and Tom are deciding to tell each other their three words. As I have discussed previously, this was the most difficult part for us to edit effectively and as the image clips were too long we had to try to cut and stretch out the voiceovers so that they fit the time. This has worked to a certain extent but as viewers rightly pointed out the sound 'cut out' every now and again where we'd cut it. Were we to do this task again that would be the main point for improvement.

On the mise-en-scene, we recieved the following comments:
'The interior cinematography was somewhat more professional than the exterior although time lapse might have been quite effective on shots such as the boyfriend eating the pizza.'
'I really like the ‘She’s gorgeous’ close up, which makes really good use of shadow and natural lighting to create a very realist yet beautiful image.'
'I liked the use of props, with beer cans and messy room and stuff for him, helped to show their characters.'
'The locations were typical teenage places and her room was more girly which made it more realistic.'
'Use of natural lighting and shadow inside looked nice.'

This tells us that again the viewers have managed to pick up on small details (such as the use of realistic props and locations) which have obviously made a difference to the quality of the film. It also tells us that we have used one of the conventions of socila realism effectively.

On the storyline and narrative structure, we recieved the follwing comments:
'I'd already read your screenplay so the concept wasn't a surprise, but realised it worked even better than I had anticipated, I thought it was the perfect form for a student film. You guys didn't attempt anything over-ambitious, it was a charming snippet of teenage innocence with some kinda profound undertones. I liked the end, in that you didn’t milk the sadness, it stayed light-hearted in a way.' '...love the story line and their different views on what they both think.'
 'so nicely written'
'internal monologues work nicely and it makes sense.'
'The concept of two people being at completely crossed emotional purposes was really interesting. It presents a classic dilemma whilst never showing any confrontation allowing the viewer to decide for themselves what action the protagonists take and heightening the inevitable pain of the situation.'
'Got straight to the point but an in interesting way as neither of them actually spoke and it was all thoughts and they went really well with their facial expressions.'

This tells us that the message we wanted to put accross in the story made sense and was taken on board by the viewers. Everyone found the story engaging (which is highly important in making a short film) and everyone watched to the end because they wanted to find out what happens. It also tells us that the risk we took with the unconventional narrative structure (not following Todorov's theory) worked and was the 'perfect form for a student film' . In our own evaluation of the work we found some of the dialogue cheesy, but none of the viewers have commented on this and someone even said that it was 'so nicely written' which means that either our target audience enjoy the slight cheesiness of it, or it's not as bad as we thought.

I have learnt alot from our audience's evaluation of our film, and it has helped hilight both the things that were most liked about it (some of which I expected, like the ending, some of which I didn't expect, like the narrative structure) and the things that could be improved upon. It's always good to have other people's opinions of your work as it lets you take a step back and view it more objectively. Overall, I am extremely pleased with the comments we recieved.

For the poster product, again we used facebook. I posted the poster as a picture on my profile and asked people to comment saying what they liked and didn't like. The comments we recieved here were generally more negative:

'Text as well as the stars can be hard to see, the tag line should maybe be more prominent as that's the only chance you have to hook an audience.'

'The credits at the bottom cross over into other lines, "di-rected" that wouldn't be seen on a poster. Like the colour use but the red is a little much, I find, contrasts too much with the black logos at the bottom, maybe as a tag line etc. but I think the credits should be standard black.'

'I really like the colour concept (although i don't get the coloured bricks' meaning). I think the title looks great as well. I agree that the tag line should be more prominent, but I can't help but feel like a little more time spent on it and you could have something more slightly instantly gratifying. It’s a great idea for a tagline and I don’t claim I can suggest anything better but I reckon you guys could. It also slightly detracts from the importance of the pairs of three words IN the film, as the poster kinda gets there too early and reduces their impact at the climax. But it’s pretty good anyway, I’m just being picky.'
'I think it looks good overall but I thought from seeing this that Tom was going to die (/had already) in the film, so I guess it's a bit misleading. It was a good idea though.'

This tells us that people have noticed a few key things that could have been cleaned up slightly. Alot of people (through spoken feedback) have also commented on the use of the coloured bricks in the back ground and questioned their importance, and wondered if they mean something. We simply put them in to replicate some of the conventions we've noticed in other posters (particularly 'Fish Tank' and 'Sommers Town') and they have no real deeper context than that, which in hindsight was perhaps not a good enouh reason to use them. People also agree with my criticism from section 2 about the possibility that from the poster the film could be interpreted to be about Tom dying due to him being in black and white. However, only one person commented on this so perhaps that is not the immediate assumption viewers make. I think it would have been better, taking into account this criticism, to make the poster more simple than it is, perhaps leaving more background space around the couple for the essential writing.

For the review, our feedback was entirely spoken rather than on facebook, as we were unable to easily post it in a format in which people would be able to read/see the words properly. Instead I showed a printed version of the finished product to other teenagers of 17-18 next to a real review from 'Little White Lies' and asked them to comment on how real they thought it looked. I wrote down some of the comments I recieved:

'The image isn't very good quality, but it would work if it wasn't a screen grab from the film. It gets your attention.'
'They look really similar, especially the actual text of the review, they look the same. What you've written's good too, it sounds like a proper review, but you've only said good stuff - you haven't been critical like a real review would be.'
'It's really similar, except those edges [referring to the text box with the title in it] should be round. I like the little Alice In Wonderland images though, they make it more interesting.'
'The format looks exactly the same, and the text sounds similar to the style of writing in the real review. You've even got the little numbers at the bottom and the page numbers.'

This tells us that we've succeeded in replicating the layout of the 'Little White Lies' version, other than the quality of the image (which couldn't be helped as it was a screen grab from final cut pro of the film) and the edges of the boxes. People also thought the wording of the review was mostly quite proffessional-sounding, though someone rightly pointed out that we hadn't been critical enough and had only said positive things, which isn't representative of the reviews we read for research. To improve on our review if we were to redo it, therefore, it would be more balanced in terms of the copy, and we would use a better quality image (even if it meant re taking it as a photo) and creating the text boxes in InDesign rather than Photoshop so they could be more easily manipulated into rounded edges. Other than these small details I am pleased with how the review turned out and the feedback we recieved.